We've had nothing like this as far as I can remember, so l here we go.
Who do you think is the world's worst general? Give your opinon and I will set up the poll. I will give my opinion once the poll is set-up.
Printable View
We've had nothing like this as far as I can remember, so l here we go.
Who do you think is the world's worst general? Give your opinon and I will set up the poll. I will give my opinion once the poll is set-up.
I nominate Stalin.
Hmmm.
OK - so in order to qualify, I'd guess you'd need to have been a command officer...
Ambrose Burnside commanded in one massive debacle; Pyrrhus of Epirus has achieved everlasting fame for his ineptitude. On the other hand, Leonidas of Sparta lost his entire force with no gain of ground; mere numbers are insufficient.
Hitler and Stalin both attempted command control of their militaries during WWII; it's possible that each would qualify. Stalin, however, did win his war... and Hitler, despite his myriad failings, did exhibit genius...
So here's my nominees:
- F.M. Haig [UK; WWI]
- Guy de Lusignan, King-Consort of Jerusalem
- Gen. James Ledlie [USA; Battle of the Crater]
- Philip VI of France [Agincourt]
- Maj. Gen. William Elphinstone
- Lord Chelmsford [Zulu War]
- President Lyndon Johnson [USA; Vietnam]
- Gen. Arthur E. Aitken [UK; Battle of Tanga]
- Gen. Kuropatkin [Russo-Japanese War]
- King Ethelred ("the Unready") of England
I'm deliberately ommitting such notables as Custer (who only lost his LAST battle), McClellan (incompetent, but led no slaughters), and Montgomery (he was surprisingly effective).
I'm not sure Johnson qualifies Gnerphk. But if so, his military ineptitude pales besides the Stanley Baldwin-Neville Chamberlain tag team, whose 'Peace at any cost' mentality amounted to near betrayal.
1st point there I must SayQuote:
Originally Posted by Gnerphk
Haig= Total Buffoon!
2nd point
Monty= Genius in The Desert had a few problems over his time (market Garden)but overall pretty good, basically redesigned the invasion of Sicily, got through the Gustav Line, Europe - he advocated for the expansion to the 5 div landing, he re-organized the 1st and 9th armies to fit as a whole force instead of peice meal, he then made it to the Rhine and crossed it without a bridge albeit after you yanks, he then cut off the dutch peninsula and took the surrender there.... (WW1 he was at Mons, Arras, On the Somme and at Passchendaele as part of IX Corps in Plumers Second Army)
My own for worst General?
Major General Hunter Weston- Gallipoli Campaign...
Lt. General Arthur Percival- Singapore....
Plus a couple others Im yet to name as it is late....
Hunter-Weston... called a rank amateur by Haig of all people. Yeah; he qualifies.
Did you know he was the only serving M.P. to simultaneously command an army in the field since the days of Napoleon?
And yes, I agree about Monty. He was extremely competent and occasionally brilliant; I've put him in the same list as McClellan and Custer because one can say the same thing about both of them. He was actually better than either, but then, he did have better intel and a far superior staff.
Wildor: I'm including Johnson only because of the "Commander-in-Chief" nominal rank awarded to the American presidents. No P.M. has ever held similar authority -- and in my opinion, this is a very good thing; political leaders have no business making purely military decisions. In my opinion, he's the worst of our CinCs -- miles beyond Truman or Dubya.
I'm sticking with Stalin. I'd like to see this thread lead into a new thread, with a poll, and each of us can "sponsor" a general. So I will present the argument that Stalin was the worst, Digger will present the argument that Haig was the worst, etc. I've never seen a thread like that attempted and I think it would be really cool.
Heh I could sponser a few of them actually but theres another story....Quote:
Originally Posted by Boleslav
I think you're right, Bole... though not about Stalin. He did win his war, after all, and he did it at a severe technologic and logistic disadvantage.
It would be tough for me to present any single one on my list as my champion "worst" general (though I suppose I could give Chelmsford a bit of a break; like Stalin, he did eventually win his war).
So... why don't some others of you go ahead and start? I'm not even going to insist on one champion alone; frankly, Digger, you can likely make an excellent case for each of your two and Haig to boot if you like. Bole - it is your idea; go ahead and show us how it's to be done, eh?
I'll edit in the poll if we [hopefully] get any more reponses.